histofthought1

Mercantilism andfreedom in Englandfrom the Tudors to the Civil War 279trine: 'the seemingly evil acts of a ruler were only an appearance the realnature of which was misconstrued by the fallible minds of the citizens'. 1 Thestrong implication, of course, is that the mind of the monarch, in contrast tothat of the lowly citizen, is infallible.Probably the most intelligent and surely the most influential of the absolutistorder-theorists in seventeenth century England was Sir Robert Filmer (1588­1653). Towards the end of his life, this obscure Kentish nobleman published aseries of royal absolutist essays in the late 1640s and early 1650s. Then, threedecades later, a Filmer revival took place, his collected essays being publishedin 1679 and his most famous work, Patriarcha or the Natural Power ofKings,written in the late 1630s or early 1640s, was printed for the first time thefollowing year. Filmer immediately and posthumously became the leadingdefender of royal absolutism from the older perspective oforder theory.Filmer angrily rejected the idea that 'by law of nature all men are bornfree' as 'heathen' doctrine. Linking individualism and self-direction to sinfulrebellion against God, Filmer warned against the 'very desire for freedomwhich caused Adam's fall from grace.'2Most notable in Filmer was his searching critique of the rising contractariandoctrine, which laid the foundation of, and therefore justified, the state insome original social contract. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) had spent all hislife in service as a tutor, companion, and intellectual guide to the Cavendishes,who were related to the royal Stuart family. Hobbes had worked out acontractarian justification for royal absolutism during the 1640s.Filmer spotted crucial flaws in Hobbes's social contract theory which wereto apply just as fully to John Locke's libertarian version four decades later:Filmer asked how likely it was, ...that all men would agree to a contract, as wasnecessary before it could become universally binding; he wanted to know howand why a contract should bind all subsequent generations; he suggested it wasunreasonable to invoke the specious notion of tacit consent. .. 3Filmer also trenchantly criticized the growing classical liberal idea of groundinggovernment in the consent of the governed. Governments, he pointed out,could not then be stable, for governments could sometimes find that consentto be withdrawn. Once concede the power of the people to consent as well asthe natural law of 'equal freedom from subjection', and the logical consequencemust be anarchism. For thenevery petty company hath a right to make a kingdom by itself; and not only everycity, but every village, and every family, nay, every particular man, a liberty tochoose himself to be his own King if he please; and he were a madman that beingby nature free, would choose any man but himself to be his own governor. Thus toavoid the having but of one King of the whole world, we shall run into a liberty of